Misinformation warnings: Twitter’s soft moderation effects on COVID-19 vaccine belief echoes

IF 4.8 2区 计算机科学 Q1 COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS Computers & Security Pub Date : 2022-03-01 DOI:10.1016/j.cose.2021.102577
Filipo Sharevski, Raniem Alsaadi, Peter Jachim, Emma Pieroni
{"title":"Misinformation warnings: Twitter’s soft moderation effects on COVID-19 vaccine belief echoes","authors":"Filipo Sharevski,&nbsp;Raniem Alsaadi,&nbsp;Peter Jachim,&nbsp;Emma Pieroni","doi":"10.1016/j.cose.2021.102577","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Twitter, prompted by the rapid spread of alternative narratives, started actively warning users about the spread of COVID-19 misinformation. This form of soft moderation comes in two forms: as an interstitial cover before the Tweet is displayed to the user or as a contextual tag displayed below the Tweet. We conducted a 319-participants study with both verified and misleading Tweets covered or tagged with the COVID-19 misinformation warnings to investigate how Twitter users perceive the accuracy of COVID-19 vaccine content on Twitter. The results suggest that the interstitial covers work, but not the contextual tags, in reducing the perceived accuracy of COVID-19 misinformation. Soft moderation is known to create so-called ”belief echoes” where the warnings echo back, instead of dispelling, preexisting beliefs about morally-charged topics. We found that such “belief echoes” do exist among Twitter users in relationship to the perceived safety and efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccine as well as the vaccination hesitancy for themselves and their children. These “belief echoes” manifested as skepticism of adequate COVID-19 immunization particularly among Republicans and Independents as well as female Twitter users. Surprisingly, we found that the belief echoes are strong enough to preclude adult Twitter users to receive the COVID-19 vaccine regardless of their education level.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51004,"journal":{"name":"Computers & Security","volume":"114 ","pages":"Article 102577"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8675217/pdf/","citationCount":"35","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Computers & Security","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167404821004016","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"计算机科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 35

Abstract

Twitter, prompted by the rapid spread of alternative narratives, started actively warning users about the spread of COVID-19 misinformation. This form of soft moderation comes in two forms: as an interstitial cover before the Tweet is displayed to the user or as a contextual tag displayed below the Tweet. We conducted a 319-participants study with both verified and misleading Tweets covered or tagged with the COVID-19 misinformation warnings to investigate how Twitter users perceive the accuracy of COVID-19 vaccine content on Twitter. The results suggest that the interstitial covers work, but not the contextual tags, in reducing the perceived accuracy of COVID-19 misinformation. Soft moderation is known to create so-called ”belief echoes” where the warnings echo back, instead of dispelling, preexisting beliefs about morally-charged topics. We found that such “belief echoes” do exist among Twitter users in relationship to the perceived safety and efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccine as well as the vaccination hesitancy for themselves and their children. These “belief echoes” manifested as skepticism of adequate COVID-19 immunization particularly among Republicans and Independents as well as female Twitter users. Surprisingly, we found that the belief echoes are strong enough to preclude adult Twitter users to receive the COVID-19 vaccine regardless of their education level.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
错误信息警告:推特对COVID-19疫苗信念的软缓和效应
在另类叙述迅速传播的推动下,推特开始积极警告用户有关COVID-19错误信息的传播。这种形式的软审核有两种形式:作为Tweet显示给用户之前的插页封面,或者作为Tweet下方显示的上下文标签。我们进行了一项319名参与者的研究,其中包括经过验证的和误导性的推文,这些推文覆盖或标记了COVID-19错误信息警告,以调查Twitter用户如何看待Twitter上COVID-19疫苗内容的准确性。结果表明,在降低COVID-19错误信息的感知准确性方面,间隙覆盖起作用,而上下文标签不起作用。众所周知,软节制会产生所谓的“信念回声”,即警告会回响,而不是消除对道德话题的预先存在的信念。我们发现,这种“信念回声”确实存在于推特用户中,涉及到对COVID-19疫苗的安全性和有效性的感知,以及对自己和孩子接种疫苗的犹豫。这些“信仰呼应”表现为对COVID-19免疫接种的怀疑,尤其是在共和党人和独立人士以及女性推特用户中。令人惊讶的是,我们发现这种信念的回声足以阻止成年推特用户接种COVID-19疫苗,无论他们的教育水平如何。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Computers & Security
Computers & Security 工程技术-计算机:信息系统
CiteScore
12.40
自引率
7.10%
发文量
365
审稿时长
10.7 months
期刊介绍: Computers & Security is the most respected technical journal in the IT security field. With its high-profile editorial board and informative regular features and columns, the journal is essential reading for IT security professionals around the world. Computers & Security provides you with a unique blend of leading edge research and sound practical management advice. It is aimed at the professional involved with computer security, audit, control and data integrity in all sectors - industry, commerce and academia. Recognized worldwide as THE primary source of reference for applied research and technical expertise it is your first step to fully secure systems.
期刊最新文献
Beyond the sandbox: Leveraging symbolic execution for evasive malware classification Trust my IDS: An explainable AI integrated deep learning-based transparent threat detection system for industrial networks PdGAT-ID: An intrusion detection method for industrial control systems based on periodic extraction and spatiotemporal graph attention Dynamic trigger-based attacks against next-generation IoT malware family classifiers Assessing cybersecurity awareness among bank employees: A multi-stage analytical approach using PLS-SEM, ANN, and fsQCA in a developing country context
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1